James Stubbenddieck gave me the history of my LC Smith it was originally a No.00 with ejectors but at some point a single trigger was added and it looks like it has factory engraving patterns. Don't know how that would enhance the value ?

Pictures.

One more picture added - just caught on to how to post pictures. This picture should complete set.

Joe

The photo looks like your shotgun is a No. 2 rather than a No. 00. I will go back and look up the serial number you provided.

Jim

Looking forward to Dr. Jim's findings.

On p. 164 of Houchins is a "early style engraving" for No. 4, that is similar to yours but with a setter on the left lockplate

I found this image in the 1903 Dunham, Carrigan and Hayden Co., San Francisco catalog which looks JUST like yours, but the image must be a No. 3??



Are the barrels marked Armor, Crown or Nitro Steel?

Please have a stock specialist evaluate your stock - it looks to be in need of glasbedding around the lockplates, esp. the right. The top lever screw also needs to be replaced.

I agree with Dr. Drew that it is a higher grade than the No. 2 that I suggested. I didn't look as closely as I should have at the engraving.

Joe, would you please send the serial number to me by email? jstubbendieck@gmail.com

Is there a number under the serial number on the watertable of the frame?

Yours is an interesting gun, and looking at the pictures; clearly the number you gave Jim is 209949, which is indeed an OOE Grade and a barrel set from a gun shipped in 1909. The number Jim needs would be stamped on the water table of the frame; and if that number matches the number on the fore iron #2566, the original gun would have shipped in 1896. The frame of your gun is clearly engraved in the early Grade 4 style (later Grade 4 guns have the dogs centered in an oval on the lock plates; early examples featured the pointing dog at the rear of the lock plate as we see hear); and on some of these early guns the grade mark is found on the barrels and not on the water table. One way to verify grade is to remove the left side lock plate and look for the grade stamped into the narrow portion of the frame cut beneath the barrel flats. At any rate, the HOT unit was not available in 1896, nor were Type II ejectors; therefore we can be sure the gun was shipped back to Hunter at some point after 1904 when the HOT trigger unit was first cataloged and upgraded to a SST/Type II auto-ejector gun. The barrels may or may not have been replaced at that time (could have been modified for Type II ejectors); but regardless, the barrels were later replaced after-market and not by Hunter Arms. I say that because Hunter would have stamped the barrel flats with the correct serial number (which I believe is 2566) and would also have engraved the exposed face of the barrel lug to match the balance of the gun. Although it was possible for a customer to order a lower-grade and cheaper set of barrels (Armor steel here as opposed to Nitro), the gun would not have shipped from the gun works without the correct serial number being stamped on its barrels. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks James and Dr. Drew, I will follow up on your questions. Can't believe that Dr.Drew noticed that there was anomaly regarding the butt stock. I have the original butt stock but an adjustable comb was added. Thanks, gentlemen.

Joe Winnicki

Serial Number 2566 was assigned to a 4E in 1898.

Joe, Jim has confirmed that your gun originally shipped as a Grade 4E gun; therefore it is not an upgraded OOE as you'd originally thought. Your original question was how would this upgrade enhance value; and since Jim doesn't assign value estimates and only reports what is recorded within the original ledgers, I'll share my experiences as to how a collector would evaluate your gun (while also avoiding value estimates). Collectors will view a gun with non-matching serial numbers as a parts or composed gun; and the stock replacement would have another negative impact (how much depends on the quality and originality of the work done), so both factors would reduce gun value to a collector. On the plus side the gun is a rare Grade 4 that was factory upgraded with Type II auto-ejectors and a Hunter One-trigger, and the gun seems to have good eye appeal; all these factors will likely enhance it's value to some degree as a shooter provided the gun functions correctly and remains mechanically sound. So the bottom line, given that the value of this gun can't be established by comparison to examples of unaltered original Grade 4E guns, is that the value of this gun is whatever sum someone would be willing to pay for a nicely engraved "shooter". Thanks for sharing, and I hope to see you shooting this gun in the upcoming Challenge.

Just to clarify (However, I may be the only one who is confused):

Serial Number 209979 was recorded as a No. 00E
Serial Number 2566 was recorded as a 4E

Jim
I didn't see a pic of the frame showing the original serial number stamp, but if it's 2566 as we see on the fore iron, that serial number on the frame is 2566; which is consistent with the 4E grade designation in the records, and the Grade 4E engraving motif seen in the frame pics. Having the serial number from OOE barrels was clearly confusing; but I understand this is one gun showing two serial numbers, and not two separate guns. If not, then clearly I am the individual who is confused.

The above picture is my LC Smith showing the water table with serial numbers that James didn't see.Encloed are pictures of the original butt stock which had been cracked and repaired I believe the wood carving was to help hide the repair. I bought the gun 3o years ago from a Reno, Nevada gun shop. Did shoot it a few times with 28 gauge tubes in the gun. I will be bringing the gun to the California SxS Society shoot in May.

Thanks for the help and interest !

Joe Winnicki

To James Stubbenddieck.James tried 4 times to email you information on my LC Smith don't believe I'm not connecting. If you'd like maybe you could email me at shootnwinn@webtv.net. tks, Joe

Joe

I received an email from you this morning with several attached photographs.

Jim